Defencr  of  tijr  C^imerniiieiit 

^  OP  Tin: 


rtpiS^rEPISCOFAL  CHURCH. 


^  BY  THE  REV.  JAMES  L  CHAPMAN, 


IN  HIS  DEBATE  WITH  THE  REV.  J.  R.  GRAVES,  AT  CANTON,  illSS 
MAY,  1855. 


PUBLISHED  BY  E.  STEVENSON  &  J.  E.  EVANS,  AGENTS, 

FOR  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH,  SOUTH. 

1856. 


Mtima  d  tlje  #nnenitiieEt 


METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 


BY  THE  REV.  JAMES  L.  CHAPMAN, 


IN  HIS  DEBATE  WITH  THE  REV.  J.  R.  GRAVES,  AT  CANTON.  MISS 
MAY.  1855. 


KasfibiUe,  Cenn,: 

PUBLISHED  BY  E.  STEVENSON  &  J.  E.  EVANS,  AGENTS, 

FOB  TaE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAl  OHUSCH,  SOUTH. 

1856. 


• 


'if 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 

OF  THE 

METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 


BY  THE  REV.  JAMES  L.  CHAPMAN. 

m  HI8  DEBATE  WITH  THB  REV.  J.  iU  GKATES,  AT  CANTON,  MISSISSIPPI,  MAY,  1865 


Moderators,  Ladies,  and  GtENTLemen  : — We  are  now 
before  you  to  prove,  whatever  maybe  the  opinions  and  doubts 
of  some,  that  the  government  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church,  whether  we  refer  to  the  writings  of  the  fathers,  or 
the  judgment  of  moderns,  is  not  only  scriptural,  but  repub- 
lican. In  advance  of  this,  we  beg  leave  to  state,  wishing  to 
bring  the  points  at  issue  fairly  and  plainly  before  all,  that 
every  form  of  government,  sanctioned  by  inspiration,  must  be 
duly  respected  by  the  followers  of  the  patriarchs,  prophets, 
and  apostles.  From  this  there  is  no  appeal.  The  voice  of 
Scripture  demands  obedience ;  and  the  teachings  of  the  age-8 
of  faith,  as  handed  down  to  us,  are  not  less  imperative.  Wc 
ai*e  not  at  liberty  to  make  war  on  the  despotism  of  the  Per- 
sian, the  democracy  of  the  Greek,  or  the  republicanism  of  the 
Roman,  favoring  and  advocating  the  theocracy  of  the  Jew. 
In  proof  of  this,  we  shall  here  give  the  exhortation  of  Peter, 
First  Epistle,  chapter  2,  beginning  with  the  thirteenth,  and 
ending  with  the  seventeenth  verse  :  "  Submit  yourselves  to 
every  ordinance  of  man  for  the  Lord's  sake,  whether  it  be  to 
the  king,  as  supreme,  or  unto  governors,  as  unto  them  that 
are  sent  by  him  for  the  punishment  of  evil-doers,  and  for  the 
praise  of  them  that  do  well.  For  so  is  the  will  of  God,  that 
with  well-doing  ye  may  put  to  silence  the  ignorance  of  foolish 

8 


DEFENCE  or  THE  G0VER:<ME>'T 


men  :  as  free,  and  not  using  your  liberty  for  a  cloak  of  mali- 
ciousness; but  as  the  servants  of  God.  Honor  all  men.  Love 
the  brotherhood.    Fear  God.    Honor  the  king." 

We  can  safely  allow  this  to  pass  without  comment.  Its 
true  and  full  sense  stands  out  boldly  on  its  Heaven-sanctioned 
outlines. 

In  a  word,  inspiration  tolerates  republicanism,  and  ventures 
not  to  dethrone  the  king. 

We  are  now  read}^,  having  made  the  preliminary  remarks 
deemed  necessary,  to  take  up  the  first  point  in  the  question, 
and  to  place  it  above  the  possibility  of  contradiction :  namely, 
that  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  is  scripturally  organized. 
Without  circumlocution  or  equivocation,  we  confidently  assert 
that  Wesley,  the  father  of  Methodism,  the  most  efficient  form 
of  Christianity  since  the  days  of  the  apostles,  was  a  scriptural 
bishop. 

The  word  bishop,  properly  speaking,  simply  signifies  an 
overseer :  that  is,  one  who  has  the  inspection  and  oversight 
of  any  thing.  With  this  the  testimony  of  Nehemiah  agrees, 
ch.  xi.  22:  "The  overseer  of  the  Levites  at  Jerusalem."  The 
most  common  acceptation  of  the  word,  however,  we  have  in 
Acts  XX.,  and  in  Paul's  Epistles.  Peter,  in  his  first  Epistle, 
ii.  25,  calls  Christ  the  Bishop  of  souls.  Isaiah  speaks  thus, 
ch.  Ix.  17  :  "I  will  also  make  thy  officers  peace,  and  thine 
overseers  (bishops)  righteousness."  Such  is  the  use  and 
meaning  of  the  word. 

We  shall  now  direct  your  attention  to  the  persons  to  whom 
it  was  applied  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  We  read  in  Acts 
XX.:  "And  from  Miletus  he  (Paul)  sent  to  Ephesus,  and 
called  the  elders  of  the  church."  What  more  ?  This,  that 
he  said  to  these  elders :  "■  Take  heed,  therefore,  unto  your- 
selves, and  to  all  the  flock  over  the  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
hath  made  you  overseers,  (bishops,)  to  feed  the  Church  of 
God,  which  he  hath  purchased  with  his  own  blood." 

In  the  language  of  Dr.  Campbell,  we  would  say:  "Here 
there  can  be  no  question  that  the  same  persons  are  denomi- 
nated presbyters  and  bishops."  This  distinction,  however,  may 
be  made — they  were  presbytei-s  by  virtue  of  ordination,  bishops 
on  account  of  having  charge  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  Wesley 
was  a  presbyter  by  virtue  of  his  ordination,  and  scriptural 
biishop  on  account  of  the  charge  over  which  he  presided. 


OF  THP;  M.   r..  CHURCH. 


6 


Here,  ^vith  great  propriety,  we  may  ask,  Have  we  not,  in  the 
;:bove  quotation,  a  clear  precedent  for  calling  Wesley  a  bishop, 
a  scriptural  bishop  ? 

Dr.  Clarke  justly  observes  :  Bishops  and  presbyters  were, 
at  this  timt\  of  the  same  order/'   See  his  note  on  Acts  xx.  28. 

In  a  word,  the  man  who  had  charge  of  a  church,  or 
churches,  was  called  a  bishop.  Elders  or  presbyters,  indeed, 
might  have  been  in  the  same  church,  or  churches,  officiating 
by  the  bishops'  permission  or  request,  to  whom  the  word 
could  not  have  been  properly  applied,  they  not  being  directly 
in  charge.  The  relation  of  a  local  elder  in  our  church  to  one 
of  cur  bishops,  may  be  looked  on  as  a  practical  illustration  of 
the  view  advanced  on  this  feature  of  the  subject. 

Paul,  in  his  first  Epistle  to  Timothy,  ch.  3,  speaks  thus  : 
This  is  a  true  saying,  if  au}^  man  desire  the  office  of  a  bishop, 
(not  the  order  of  a  bishop,)  he  desireth  a  good  work.  A 
bishop,  then,  must  be  blameless  :  the  husband  of  one  wife  : 
vigilant,  sober,  of  good  behavior,  given  to  hospitality,  apt  to 
teach  :  not  given  to  wine.''  The  apostle,  after  giving  direc- 
tions respecting  the  bishop,  proceeds  to  give  directions  respect- 
ing deacons ;  but  does  not  give  the  slightest  intimation  of  the 
existence  of  a  middle  order,  now  known  by  the  name  of  priest 
or  elder — a  fact  which  clearly  demonstrates  that  no  such  order 
then  existed.  All  will  please  remember  that  the  apostle 
speaks  of  the  office  of  a  bishop,  not  of  the  order  of  a  bishop. 
He  wrote,  knowing  that  the  office  of  a  bishop  included  the 
order  of  the  elder. 

Was  not  Wesley  a  bishop  in  this  sense  ?  Most  assuredly. 

Paul,  addressing  the  Philippians,  says  :  To  all  the  saints 
in  Christ  Jesus  which  are  at  Philippi,  with  the  bishops  and 
deacons."  (Ch.  1.)  Here  we  have  again  bishops  and  dea- 
cons, but  not  one  word  respecting  the  "middle  order,"  priest 
or  presbyter.  Wesley,  in  view  of  this,  declared  :  I  firmly 
believe  that  I  am  a  scriptural  bishop — as  much  so  as  any 
man  in  England,  or  in  Europe ;  for  the  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion I  know  to  be  a  fable,  which  no  man  ever  did  or  can 
prove."    See  Watson's  Wesley,  p.  247. 

The  following  passage,  from  the  fifth  chapter  of  Peter's  first 
Epistle,  will  show  that  our  position  respecting  bishop  and 
elder  cannot  reasonably  be  disputed  :     The  elders  which  are 
k         amoug  you  I  exhort :  feed  the  flock  of  God  which  is  among 


i)  DErENOE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 

yon,  taking  the  oversiglit  thereof."  ''That  is/'  says  Richard 
AVatson,  "  discharging  the  office  of  bishops/' 

We  shall  now  invite  special  attention  to  the  charge  of  Paul 
to  Titus,  concerning  Crete  :  "  For  this  cause  I  left  thee  in 
Crete,  that  thou  shouldst  set  in  order  the  things  that  are 
wanting,  and  ordain  elders  iu  every  city,  as  I  had  appointed 
thee."    Titus  i.  5. 

Homer,  speaking  of  Crete,  says  : 

"Crete  awes  the  circling  waves,  a  fruitful  soil, 
And  ninety  cities  crown  the  sea-born  isle." 

Though  he  only  attributes  to  the  island  iu  this  quotation 
ninety  cities,  yet  in  another  place  he  speaks  of  one  hundred 
cities.  Whether  we  contemplate  ninety  or  one  hundred 
cities,  Titus  was  instructed  to  ordain  elders  in  every  city. 
Here  we  have  a  missionary  bishop,  his  power  extending  over 
one  hundred  cities.  These  elders,  when  appointed  to  their 
respective  charges  and  places,  were  called  bishops :  hence  we 
read  in  the  seventh  verse  :  "For  a  bishop  must  be  blameless." 

Did  not  Paul  instruct  Titus  to  ordain  elders  in  one  hundred 
cities  ?  Did  not  Wesley  see  in  this  a  precedent  for  setting- 
Coke  apart,  to  set  in  order  the  things  that  were  wanting  in 
the  American  societies  ?  Did  not  Coke  act  in  America,  as 
Titus  acted  in  the  island  of  Crete  ?  Wesley  cannot  be  cen- 
sured for  what  he  did  in  this  instance,  except  at  the  expense 
of  censuring  Paul  too.  Nor  can  Coke  be  censured,  without 
censuring  Titus  also. 

Thus  we  prove  that  Wesley  was  a  scriptural  bishop,  and 
that  he  only  followed  an  example  set  by  Paul,  when  he  acted 
as  he  did  in  reference  to  the  American  societies. 

He  who  would  demand  additional  proof,  might,  with  equal 
m'opriety,  demand  confirming  evidence,  the  sun  shining,  of 
.AC  existence  of  day. 

We  shall  now  direct  attention  to  the  various  officers  found 
.11  our  fellowship,  in  order  to  show  that  they  are  fully  covered 
by  the  rich  provisions  of  inspiration.  In  our  organization  we 
have  bishops,  presiding  elders,  travelling  preachers,  stationed 
preachers,  local  preachers,  deacons,  local  deacons,  exhorters, 
and  class-leaders. 

Paul,  in  his  first  epistle  to  the  Church  at  Corinth,  chapter 
xii.  28,  says  :  "And  Grod  hath  set  some  in  the  Church — first^ 


or  THE    M.   E.  CHURCH. 


7 


apostles;  secondarily,  prophets;  thirdly,  teachers:  after  that, 
miracles;  then  gifts  of  healings,  helps,  governments,  diversi- 
ties of  tongues." 

Here  we  observe  with  more  than  ordinary  emphasis,  wishing 
to  be  distinctly  understood,  that  our  advocacy  in  this  connec- 
tion will  be  that  of  principles,  not  of  names.  To  the  former 
we  profcvss  unyielding  devotion,  to  the  latter  marked  indiffer- 
ence. For  instance,  might  we  not  call  the  President  of  the 
United  States  the  Prince  of  the  People,  without  the  slightest 
infringement  on  the  principle  involved  in  his  office  ?  Cer- 
tainly. 

That  this  view  of  the  case  may  appear  remarkably  obvious 
to  all,  we  shall  resort  to  contrast.  Did  not  the  apostles  travel 
in  certain  districts,  ordaining  men  for  the  work  of  the  minis- 
try ?  Do  not  our  bishops  travel  in  certain  districts,  ordaining 
men  set  apart  for  the  work  of  the  Lord  ?  Did  not  the  pro- 
phets, named  above,  teach  ?  Dr.  Clarke  responds  :  "  The 
word  (prophets)  is  often  applied  to  those  who  preached  the 
gospel. Do  not  our  ministers  teach  the  people  by  preaching? 
Did  not  the  teachers,  mentioned  in  the  quotation,  instruct  the 
people  in  the  elements  of  the  Christian  religion  ?  Do  not  our 
local  preachers  perform  a  similar  duty  ?  Did  not  the  helps, 
above  designated,  discharge  ordinary  duties  for' the  apostles  ? 
Do  not  our  exhorters  and  class-leaders  perform  ordinary  du- 
ties ?  Thus  we  see  that  the  officers  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
'pal  Church  are  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of  the  « 
Scriptures.  The  example  before  us  is  a  self-obvious  proof 
of  this. 

The  next  item  in  order  is,  can  the  decisions  of  our  bishops, 
and  the  elements  of  our  conferences,  be  defended  by  any 
example  in  the  Scriptures  ?  We  answer  yes — boldly  say  yes. 
James,  who  was  president  of  the  council,  the  notable  counoil, 
at  Jerusalem,  pronounced  the  following  decision:  '^Where- 
fore my  sentence  is,  that  we  trouble  not  them,  which  from 
among  the  Gentiles  are  turned  to  God."  Acts  xv.  19.  Dr. 
Clarke,  whose  critical  knowledge  commands  the  respect  of  the 
learned  world,  thus  expresses  himself  on  this  matter  :  ''James 
determined  what  ought  to  be  done."  Again  he  says  :  "  This 
was  the  first  council  ever  held  in  the  Christian  Church ;  and 
we  find  it  was  composed  of  the  apostles  and  elders  simply." 
If  our  Annual  and  General  Conferences  are  composed  of 


8 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


bishops  and  ministers,  do  we  not  find  an  imposing  example 
for  the  whole,  including  the  decisions  of  the  bishops,  in  the 
council  of  the  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem. 

Thus  we  prove  that  the  ofiicers  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  are  in  accordance  with  the  liberty  and  provisions  of 
inspiration — that  the  Church  is  scripturally  organized  in  this 
particular.  # 

We  shall  now  direct  attention  to  the  writings  of  the  early- 
fathers,  in  order  to  show  that  our  position  respecting  a  bishop 
is  founded  on  transmitted  truth — truth  transmitted  from  the 
apostles.  From  their  writings,  we  shall  be  able  to  establish 
the  principle  involved ;  and  here  we  remark,  that  this  is  all 
we  aim  at,  being  aware  that  there  are  things  contained  in  them 
which  cannot  be  defended. 

Clement  of  Rome,  A.  D.  87,  saj^s  :  ^'And  thus  preaching 
through  countries  and  cities,  they  (apostles)  appointed  the  first 
fruits  of  their  conversions  to  be  bishops  and  ministers  over 
such  as  should  afterwards  believe,  having  first  proved  them  by 
the  Spirit.  Nor  was  this  any  new  thing,  seeing  that  long 
before  it  was  written  concerniug  bishops  and  deacons.  For 
thus  saith  the  Scriptures  in  a  certain  place,  I  will  appoint 
their  overseers  in  righteousness,  and  their  ministers  in  faith." 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  chapter  xviii. 

In  chapter  xxiv.  he  says  :  "  It  is  a  shame,  my  beloved,  yea, 
a  veiy  great  shame,  and  unworthy  of  your  Christian  profession, 
to  hear  that  the  most  firm  and  ancient  Church  of  the  Corinth- 
ians should,  by  one  or  two  persons,  be  led  into  a  sedition 
against  its  priests."  Again,  in  the  xxi.  chapter,  he  says : 
"  Only  let  the  flock  of  Christ  be  in  peace  with  the  elders  that 
are  set  over  it."  He  continues  this  subject  thus  :  "  Our  apos- 
tles knew  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  that  there  should  be  con- 
tentions on  account  of  Episcopacy.  And,  therefore,  having  a 
perfect  knowledge  of  this,  they  appointed  persons,  as  we  have 
before  said,  and  then  gave  directions,  how  when  they  should 
die,  other  chosen  men  should  succeed  in  their  ministry." 
Lord  Barrington  expresses  himself  thus  respecting  the  writ- 
ings of  Clement:  Bishops  with  Clement  are  always  the 
same  with  elders  or  presbyters,  as  any  one  must  see  if  they 
read  the  epistle."    Vol.  2,  p.  154,  ed.  1770. 

Ignatius,  A.  D.  107,  says :  "And  blessed  be  God,  who  has 
granted  unto  you,  who  are  so  worthy  of  him,  to  enjoy  such  an 


OF  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


9 


excellent  bishop.  For  what  concerns  my  fellow-servant  Bur- 
rhus,  and  your  most  most  blessed  deacon  in  things  pertaining 
to  God  :  I  entreat  you  that  he  may  t^rry  longer,  both  for  yours 
and  your  bishop's  honor."  See  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  first 
chapter. 

Again  he  says  :  ''And  that  being  subject  to  your  bishop  and 
presbytery,  you  may  be  wholly  and  thoroughly  sanctified.'' 
He  shows  in  the  following  language  that  all  these  were  of  the 
same  Church  :  "  Wherefore  it  will  become  you  to  run  together 
according  to  the  will  of  your  bishop,  as  also  ye  do.  For  your 
famous  Presbytery  (that  is,  of  the  Ephesian  Church)  worthy 
of  Grod,  is  fitted  as  exactly  to  the  bishop,  as  the  strings  are  to 
the  harp.  Therefore  in  your  concord  and  agreeing  charity, 
J esus  Christ  is  sung,  and  every  single  person  among  you  makes 
up  the  chorus.'' 

In  his  epistle  to  the  Magnesians,  first  chapter,  he  says  : 
"  Seeing  then  I  have  been  judged  worthy  to  see  you,  by 
Damas,  your  most  excellent  bishop ;  and  by  your  very  worthy 
presbyters,  Bassus  and  Apollonius ;  and  by  my  fellow-servant 
Sotio,  the  deacon,  in  whom  I  rejoice,  forasmuch  as  he  is  sub- 
ject unto  his  bishop  as  to  the  grace  of  Grod,  and  to  the  Pres- 
bytery as  to  that  of  Jesus  Christ :  I  determined  to  write  unto 

.  ... 

His  language  in  the  second  chapter  is  :  "  Your  bishop  pre- 
siding in  the  place  of  God,  your  presbyters  in  the  place  of  the 
council  of  the  apostles ;  and  your  deacons  most  dear  to  me. 
As  therefore  the  Lord  did  nothing  without  the  Father,  being 
united  to  him;  so  neither  do  ye  do  any  thing  without  your 
bishop  and  presbyters." 

In  his  epistle  to  the  Trallians,  first  chapter,  he  speaks  thus : 
''It  is  therefore  necessary,  that  as  ye  do,  so  without  your 
bishop,  you  should  do  nothing:  also  be  ye  subject  to  your 
presbyters,  as  to  the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ  our  hope;  in 
whom,  if  we  walk,  we  shall  be  found  in  him.  The  deacons 
also,  as  being  the  ministers  of  the  mysteries  of  Jesus  Christ, 
must  by  all  means  please  all.  In  like  manner  let  all  reverence 
the  deacons  as  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  bishop  as  the  Father,  and 
the  presbyters  as  the  Sandedrim  of  God,  and  college  of  apos- 
tles." 

From  these  quotations  we  clearly  prove  that  bishops, 
presbyters,  and  deacons  were  known  to  the  organization  of  the 


10 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


Church  at  a  very  early  period  of  her  Christian  history.  The 
cause  of  truth,  however,  demands  that  we  should  here  state, 
that  the  genuineness  of  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  is  doubted  by 
many. 

Let  us  now  direct  your  attention  to  testimony  which  will 
not  be  questioned — testimony  which  will  clearly  show  what 
bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons  were  in  the  first  ages  of  the 
Christian  Church. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  175,  says  :  I  take  the  pro- 
gression of  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons  to  be  imitations 
of  the  angelic  glory.^^    Strom.  6  p.  667. 

Clement,  in  the  seventh  book  of  the  same  work,  gives  us 
his  meaning  respecting  officers  in  the  Church  :  One  part  of 
it  (public  worship)  is  performed  by  superior  ministers,  another 
part  by  inferior  ministers.  The  superior  part  is  performed  by 
presbyters,  the  inferior,  or  servile  part,  by  deacons."  These 
presbyters  were  bishops  :  presbyters  by  ordination,  bishops  by 
office. 

Irenagus,  A.  D.  178,  says  :  "  AYe  can  enumerate  those  who 
were  appointed  by  the  apostles,  bishops  in  the  churches,  and 
their  successors,  even  unto  us."    Adv.  Heer.  4,  63. 

He  again  says  :  "  The  apostles  wished  those  to  be  very 
perfect  and  irreprehensible  in  all  things,  whom  they  left 
their  successors,  delivering  to  them  their  own  place  of  govern- 
ment." 

And  again  he  says  :  But  when  we  appeal  to  that  tradition 
which  has  been  preserved  us  by  the  successions  of  presbyters 
in  the  churches,  they  presume  they  are  wiser  not  only  than 
the  presbyters,  but  even  than  the  apostles,  and  that  they  have 
found  the  truth  in  a  purer  form.''    Lib.  3,  ch.  2. 

Here,  if  we  deemed  it  necessary,  we  could  show  that  the 
action  of  Wesley  is  fully  covered  by  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus, 
which  is  in  agreement  with  that  of  inspiration. 

Tertullian,  A.  D.  100,  speaks  thus :  The  highest  priest, 
who  is  the  bishop,  has  the  right  of  administering  baptism. 
Then  the  presbyters  and  deacons,  yet  not  without  the  authority 
of  the  bishop,  because  of  the  honor  of  the  Church.  This 
being  preserved,  peace  is  preserved.  Otherwise  the  right 
belongs  even  to  laymen.  However,  the  laity  ought  especially 
to  submit  humbly  and  modestly  to  the  discipline  of  the 
Church  in  these  matters,  and  not  assume  the  office  of  bishop, 


OF  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


11 


seeing  their  superiors  and  deacons  submit  to  the  same."  De 
Baptismo,  ch.  17. 

We  shall  now  hear  what  he  says  respecting  the  principal 
officers — bishops:  "Approved  elders  or  presbyters  preside 
among  us,  having  received  the  honor,  not  by  money,  but  by 
the  suffrages  of  their  brethren. Ch.  39. 

Are  not  our  bishops  elected  in  a  similar  way  ? 

The  true  position  of  a  bishop  is  thus  explained  by  Cyprian, 
who  wrote  250,  A.  D. :  "  Our  Lord  gives  to  all  the  apostles 
an  equal  power,  and  says :  ^As  my  Father  sent  me,  even  so 
send  I  you  :  receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost :  whosesoever  sins  ye 
remit,  they  shall  be  remitted  to  him,  and  whosesoever  sins  ye 
retain,  they  shall  be  retained.'  Certainly  the  other  apostles 
also  were  what  Peter  was — endowed  with  an  equal  fellowship 
of  honor  and  power.  No  one  ought  to  make  himself  bishop 
of  bishops,  or  pretend  to  awe  his  brethren,  for  every  bishop  is 
at  liberty  to  do  as  he  pleases. Primitive  Church  by  Chapin, 
p.  258. 

Cyprian,  in  another  place,  calls  the  bishop  a  president.  His 
language  is  :  "  Those  who  have  been  baptized  in  the  Church 
are  brought  to  the  president  of  the  Church,  that  by  our  prayer 
and  imposition  of  hands,  they  may  receive  the  Holy  Ghost.'' 
Ep.  73. 

, Were  not  our  bishops  originally  called  superintendents  ? 
Justin  Martyr,  who  wrote  140,  A.  D.,  uses  similar  language. 
His  words  are  :  "  To  him  who  presides  over  the  brethren  bread 
is  brought,  and  a  cup  of  wine  mixed  with  water.  He  who 
presides  having  given  thanks,  they  who  are  called  amongst  us 
deacons  give  to  each  of  those  present  a  portion  of  the  bread 
and  of  wine  mixed  with  water,  over  which  the  thanksgiving 
has  been  made,  and  carry  away  a  portion  to  those  who  are 
absent."    Apol.  1,  ed.  Bened.  Paris,  1742. 

In  another  place  he  calls  the  bishop  a  president,  saying : 
"The  president  delivers  a  discourse."  And  again:  "The 
president  offers  up  prayers  and  thanksgiving."  This  proves 
that  in  their  days  the  highest  officer  was  called  a  president  of 
the  assembly,  that  is,  an  elder  by  ordination,  and  a  bishop  by 
office. 

Firmilian,  250,  A.  D.,  says:  "All  power  and  grace  is  in 
the  Church  in  which  presbyters  preside,  and  have  the  power 
of  baptizing,  confirming,  and  ordaining."     Have  we  not 


12 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


proved  that  AV^esley  was  a  presbyter  and  a  scriptural  bishop  ? 
And  here,  we  ask,  what  does  the  far-famed  Firmihan,  Bishop 
of  Cesarea,  say  respecting  a  presiding  presbyter?  He  has 
"  the  power  of  baptizing,  confirming,  and  ordaining."  Euse- 
bius  thus  speaks  of  him  :  "  He  was  very  famous."  Eccles. 
ch.  2r>  Howel  presents  him  in  this  light :  He  made  a  much 
more  considerable  figure  in  the  Church  at  that  time  than  the 
Bishop  of  Rome."    See  Howel's  Pontificate,  p.  24. 

In  a  commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  published  in  the 
works  of  Ambrose,  who  flourished  A.  D.  370,  we  have  the 
following  information  respecting  church  officers  :  The  pres- 
byters and  bishop  had  one  and  the  same  ordination.  The 
bishop  is  the  chief  among  the  presbyters. Com.  on  1  Tim.  3. 
^'As  one  departed,  the  next  succeeded  to  the  office  " — was 
"  constituted  such  by  the  judgment  of  a  number  of  the  pres- 
byters."   Com.  on  Ephe.  cap.  4. 

In  like  manner  we  elect  our  bishops. 

The  thirteenth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Ancyra,  A.  D.  315, 
reads  thus:  ''^Tis  not  allowed  to  village  bishops  to  ordain 
presbyters  and  deacons ;  nor  is  it  allowed  even  to  city  pres- 
byters to  do  this  in  another  diocese  without  the  license  of  a 
bishop." 

This  canon  not  only  maintains  the  office  of  a  bishop,  but 
the  right  of  a  presbyter  to  ordain.  Methodism  can  quietly  sit 
down  under  its  protection,  feeling  that  its  claims,  however 
viewed,  are  in  accordance  with  the  precedents  of  the  history 
of  the  church. 

Jerome,  who  wrote  400,  A.  D.,  speaks  as  follows  on  the 
point  at  issue :  "  In  both  Epistles,  (Timothy  and  Titus,) 
whether  bishops  or  presbyters,  (although  among  the  ancients 
the  same  who  were  bishops  were  also  presbyters,)  they  were 
commanded  to  be  chosen  into  the  clergy,  who  had  but  one 
wife."  Again  :  "  I  hear  that  one  was  so  impudent  as  to  rank 
deacons  before  presbyters,  that  is,  bishops.  Now  the  apostle 
plainly  declares  the  same  to  be  presbyters  who  also  are 
bishops."  And  again,  quoting  from  Caius,  he  says  :  "In  the 
Sec  of  Alexandria,  from  St.  Mark,  the  evangelist,  to  Heraclas 
and  Dionysius,  bishops,  the  presbyters  always  elected  one  from 
among  themselves,  and  raising  him  to  a  higher  rank,  they 
called  him  bishop ;  much  as  an  army  chooses  an  emperor,  or 
as  deacon,s  elect  one  from  among  themselves,  and  call  him 


or  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


Archdeacon.  Indeed,  what  can  a  bishop  do,  that  a  presbyter 
may  not  do,  except  ordination  ?"  To  this  he  adds  :  "  Wherever 
the  bishop  be,  whether  at  Rome,  or  Eugubium,  or  Constanti- 
nople, or  Khegium,  or  Alexandria,  or  Tanais,  he  is  of  the  same 
degree,  and  of  the  same  priesthood ;  for  all  are  successors  of 
the  apostles.  Presbyter  is  a  title  of  age,  bishop  of  office. 
Wherefore  (in  the  Epistles)  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  is  mention 
made  of  the  ordioation  of  bishops  and  deacons,  but  not  of 
presbyters  ?  Because  in  the  bishop  the  presbyter  is  contained. 
The  same,  therefore,  is  a  presbyter,  who  also  is  a  bishop ;  for 
before,  by  the  instigation  of  the  devil,  parties  were  formed  in 
religion,  and  it  was  said  by  the  people,  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I 
of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas,  the  churches  were  governed  by 
the  council  of  presbyters.  But  after  some  began  to  consider 
those  which  he  had  baptized  to  be  his  own,  not  Christ's,  it 
was  decreed  throughout  the  whole  world,  that  one  be  elected, 
who  should  be  put  over  the  rest  of  the  presbyters,  to  whom 
the  care  of  all  the  church  should  pertain;  and  thus  the  seeds 
of  schism  were  taken  away.  If  any  one  esteems  it  not  of 
Scripture,  but  to  be  our  opinion,  that  bishops  and  presbyters 
are  one,  this  being  a  title  of  age,  that  of  office,  he  is  referred 
to  the  language  of  the  apostle  to  the  Philippians." 

Does  not  Jerome  state  that  bishop  is  a  title  of  office  ?  And 
does  he  not  state  that  the  presbyters  of  Alexandria  elected 
their  bishops?  Do  not  our  ministers,  in  the  General  Con- 
ference, elect  our  bishops  ?  And  do  we  not  agree  with  Jerome 
in  this,  that  bishop  is  a  title  of  office  ? 

Thus  we  prove  by  the  testimony  of  the  early  fathers  that 
our  organization  is  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures,  so  far 
as  our  principal  officers  are  concerned. 

Having  given  the  Scriptural  view  of  church  officers,  also 
the  sense  of  the  fathers  on  the  same  subject,  we  shall  now 
proceed  to  show  that  modern  authors  fully  and  clearly  confirm 
our  position. 

Wickliff,  called  the  morning  star  of  the  reformation,  says : 
^^I  boldly  assert  one  thing,  viz.,  that  in  the  primitive  church, 
or  in  the  time  of  St.  Paul,  two  orders  of  the  clergy  were  suffi- 
cient, that  is,  a  priest  and  a  deacon.  In  like  manner  I  affirm, 
that  in  the  time  of  Paul  the  presbyter  and  the  bishop  were 
name^  of  the  same  office.  This  appears  from  the  third  chapter 
of  the  first  epistle  to  Timothy,  and  in  the  first  chapter  of  tha 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


epistle  to  Titus.  And  the  same  is  testified  by  that  profound 
theologian  Jerome."  (See  WicklifiF's  Trialogus,  as  quoted 
by  Yaughan  in  his  Life  of  Wickliff,  vol.  2,  p.  275  ]  Lou.  ed. 
1831.) 

Critically  speaking,  the  office  of  the  bishop  included  the 
order  of  the  presbyter  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  This  we 
have  placed  beyond  the  possibility  of  contradiction. 

Dr.  Robertson  says  :  "  I  do  not  think  it  absurd  that  a  priest 
should  consecrate  a  bishop,  it  a  bishop  cannot  be  had. — {Foxoell 
on  Apostolic  Succession,  p.  150.) 

Wesley's  conduct,  in  setting  Coke  apart  for  America,  could 
be  defended  by  this  sentiment,  but  we  have  claimed  for  him 
higher  ground,  that  he  was  a  Scriptural  bishop. 

Bishop  of  London  :  ''I  think  the  bishops  were  first,  and 
yet  I  think  it  is  not  of  importance,  whether  the  priest  then 
made  the  bishop,  or  the  bishop  the  priest;  considering  after 
the  sentence  of  Jerome,  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  church 
there  was  no  (or  if  there  were,  very  small)  difference  between 
a  bishop  and  a  priest,  especially  touching  the  signification." 
Ibicl,^.  150.  The  difference,  as  we  have  already  shown,  was 
this :  the  ordination  of  a  man  made  him  an  elder,  and  his 
appointment  to  officiate  made  him  a  bishop. 

Dr.  Redmayne  :  They  all  be  of  like  beginning,  and  at  the 
beginning  were  both  one,  as  St.  Hierome  and  other  old  authors 
show  by  the  Scriptures,  wherefore  one  made  another  indiffer- 
ently."   Ibid,  p.  150.    This  needs  no  comment. 

Johnson,  the  translator  of  the  canons  of  the  universal 
church,  says  :  That  opinion,  that  the  order  of  priests  and 
bishops  was  the  same,  prevailed  in  the  church  at  Rome  for 
four  or  five  ages  before  the  reformation."    Ibid,  p.  174. 

Such  are  the  sentiments  of  our  best  modern  authors. 

We  shall  now,  however,  allow  Wesley  to  speak  for  himself : 
"  Bristol,  September  10,  1784. 

"  By  a  ver}^  uncommon  train  of  providences,  many  of  the 
provinces  of  North  America  are  totally  disjointed  from  their 
mother  country,  and  erected  into  independent  States.  The 
English  government  has  no  authority  over  them,  either  civil 
or  ecclesiastical,  any  more  than  over  the  States  of  Holland.  A 
civil  authority  is  exercised  over  them,  partly  by  the  Congress, 
partly  by  the  Provincial  Assemblies.  But  no  one  either  exer- 
cises or  claims  any  ecclesiastical  authority  at  all.    In  this 


OP  THE  M.  E.  OHUROH. 


15 


peculiar  situation^  some  thousands  of  the  inhabitants  of  these 
States  desire  my  advice ;  and  in  compliance  with  their  desire 
I  have  drawn  up  a  little  sketch, 

'^Lord  King's  account  of  the  primitive  Church  convinced 
me,  many  years  ago,  that  bishops  and  presbyters  are  the  same 
order,  and  consequently  have  the  same  right  to  ordain.  For 
many  years  I  have  been  importuned,  from  time  to  time,  to 
exercise  this  right,  by  ordaining  part  of  our  travelling  preach- 
ers, but  I  have  still  refused,  not  only  for  peace'  sake,  but  be- 
cause I  was  determined,  as  little  as  possible,  to  violate  the 
established  order  of  the  national  church  to  which  I  belonged. 

But  the  case  is  widely  different  between  England  and 
North  America.  Here  there  are  bishops  who  have  a  legal 
jurisdiction.  In  America  there  are  none,  neither  any  parish 
ministers.  So  that,  for  some  hundred  miles  together,  there 
is  none  either  to  baptize  or  to  administer  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Here,  therefore,  my  scruples  are  at  an  end ;  and  I  conceive 
myself  at  full  liberty,  as  I  violate  no  order,  and  invade  no 
man's  right,  by  appointing  and  sending  laborers  into  the  har- 
vest. I  have  accordingly  appointed  Dr.  Coke  and  Mr.  Francis 
Asbury  to  be  joint  superintendents  over  our  brethren  in  North 
America,  and  also  Richard  Whatcoat  and  Thomas  Vasey  to  act 
as  elders  among  them,  by  baptizing  and  administering  the 
Lord's  Supper. 

If  any  one  will  point  out  a  more  rational  and  scriptural 
way  of  feeding  and  guiding  those  poor  sheep  in  the  wilderness, 
I  will  gladly  embrace  it.  At  present  I  cannot  see  any  better 
method  than  that  I  have  taken.  John  Wesley.'' 

Wesley,  vindicating  his  authority  to  do  what  we  have  stated, 
observed,  in  answer  to  his  brother :  "  I  firmly  believe  that  I 
am  a  scriptural  bishop,  as  much  so  as  any  man  in  England,  or 
in  Europe ;  for  the  uninterrupted  succession  I  know  to  be  a 
fable,  which  no  man  ever  did  or  can  prove." 

Have  we  not  proved  from  the  Scriptures  that  he  was  a 
bi«hop  ?  Have  we  not  proved  from  the  writings  of  the  early 
fathers  that  he  was  a  bishop  ?  And  have  we  not  proved  by 
the  statements  and  admissions  of  modern  writers  that  he  was 
a  bishop  ?  Does  it  not  therefore  follow,  that  he  acted  scrip- 
turally  in  reference  to  the  organization  of  the  Methodist  Church 
in  this  country  ? 


16 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  GOVERN MENT 


The  following  declaration,  which  was  signed  by  Cromwell, 
vicar-general,  Cranmer,  and  Holgate,  archbishops,  confirms, 
if  additional  proof  be  needed  from  such  quarters,  the  position 
for  which  we  so  strenuously  contend  :  "  The  truth  is,  there 
is  no  mention  made  of  any  degrees  or  distinctions  in  orders, 
but  only  of  deacons  or  ministers,  or  of  priests  or  bishops."  It 
is  worthy  of  remark  here,  that  Archbishop  Usher's  plan  for 
comprehending  the  Presbyterians  and  Episcopalians  in  the 
time  of  Charles  L,  was  also  founded  on  the  principle  of  bishops 
and  presbyters  being  one  order. 

Let  it  be  remembered,  however,  that  a  man  might  have 
been  an  elder  or  a  priest  in  apostolic  times,  without  being  a 
bishop;  but  let  it  also  be  remembered,  that  he,  who  was  then 
a  bishop,  was  such  by  virtue  of  office,  and  not  by  virtue  of  a 
distinct  order. 

On  this  principle  Wesley  acted,  persuaded  he  was  a  scrip- 
tural bishop.  It  now  remains  for  us  to  say,  that  the  consider- 
ations and  facts  presented  are  sufficient,  fully  sufficient  to 
convince  the  reflecting  mind,  that  Wesley  acted  in  accordance 
with  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  the  Scriptures,  when  he 
organized,  through  Coke  and  Asbury,  American  Methodism. 

If  it  should  be  asked,  How  came  Wesley  to  lay  hands  on 
Coke,  seeing  he  was  as  much  a  scriptural  bishop  as  himself? 
Our  answer  is,  were  not  hands  laid  on  Paul  and  Barnabas,  in 
order  to  set  them  apart  for  a  particular  work  ?  In  this  Wesley 
saw  a  scriptural  precedent  in  setting  Coke  apart  for  a  special 
work  in  America. 

This  precedent  is  thus  given  in  the  Acts  of  the  xlpostles, 
chapter  xiii.  :  Now  there  were  in  the  church  that  was  at 
Antioch  certain  prophets  and  teachers,  as  Barnabas,  and 
Simeon,  and  Lucius,  and  Manaen,  and  Saul.  As  they  minis- 
tered to  the  Lord,  and  fasted,  the  Holy  Ghost  said.  Separate 
me  Barnabas  and  Saul,  for  the  work  whereunto  I  have  called 
them.  And  when  they  had  fasted  and  prayed,  and  laid  their 
hands  on  them,  they  sent  them  away." 

In  the  light  of  this  passage  we  not  only  see  the  act  of 
Wesley,  in  setting  apart  Coke,  fully  approved,  but  the  very 
manner  of  it.  And  so  we  close  the  argument  on  the  first  point 
in  the  question,  that  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  is  scrip- 
turally  organized. 

The  remaining  point  in  the  question  to  be  established  is, 


OF  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


17 


that  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  is  republican  in  her  or- 
ganization. Webster  defines  the  word  Republic  thus  :  ''A 
Commonwealth ;  a  state  in  which  the  exercise  of  the  sovereign 
power  is  lodged  in  representatives  elected  by  the  people.  In 
modern  usage  it  differs  from  a  democracy  or  democratic  state, 
in  which  the  people  exercise  the  powers  of  sovereignty  in 
person.''  From  this  we  see  that  neither  the  government  of 
the  United  States,  nor  that  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church 
can  be  looked  on  as  being  democratic ;  that  both  are  republi- 
can in  their  character,  sovereign  power  being  lodged  in  their 
representatives. 

How  often  do  we  use  words  without  seeming  to  be  aware  of 
their  proper  meaning  and  application.  For  instance,  Mr.  A. 
says,  '^I  am  a  democrat."  This  is  easily  said;  but  what  is 
the  meaning  of  the  word  democrat  ?  Webster  responds,  "  One 
who  favors  the  extension  of  the  right  of  suffrage  to  all  classes." 
So  far  as  the  approval  of  this  is  concerned,  we  are  all  Know 
Nothings"  by  profession,  principle,  and  act.  A  democrat  of 
this  class  would  be  a  very  novel  sight.  In  a  word,  we  might 
as  well  undertake  to  find  some  of  the  timbers  of  Noah's  Ark, 
or  the  needle  with  which  Eve  made  her  first  fashionable  dresses, 
as  to  find  such  a  democrat. 

The  character  of  democracy  and  that  of  republicanism 
being  stated,  we  are  now  ready  to  show  that  the  principle  of 
the  latter  is  embodied  in  the  polity  and  policy  of  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church. 

Do  we  not  in  civil  affairs  lodge  sovereign  power  in  our  re- 
presentatives ?  That  is,  after  being  elected,  they  exercise  the 
right  of  making  laws,  and  of  governing.  Do  not  Methodists 
elect  all  their  officers  ?    The  discipline  respecting  this  fact  is  : 

No  person  shall  be  licensed  to  preach  without  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  society  of  which  he  is  a  member,  or  of  a 
leaders'  meeting."  Page  34,  ed.  1846.  Every  bishop  of  our 
church  was  so  elected  to  the  ministry.  Without  this  not  one 
of  them  could  have  been  made  a  bishop.  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered too,  that  our  women,  and  those  under  twenty-one,  arc 
allowed  to  vote  in  our  societies-  Here  we  have  republicanism, 
granting  liberties,  which  are  not  granted  in  State  affairs.  In 
State  affairs  the  women  are  not  permitted  to  vote,  nor  are  young 
men  under  a  certain  age.  The  republicanism  of  the  Me- 
thodist Episcopal  Church,  all  must  see  from  these  con- 
2* 


18 


DEFENCE  OP  THE  GOVERNMENT 


siderations,  breathes  a  freer  air  than  the  republicanism  of  the 
States. 

The  candidate,  after  being  elected  as  above  stated,  appears 
before  the  Quarterly  Conference  for  license  to  preach.  This 
leads  us  to  inquire  into  the  character  and  power  of  the  Quar- 
terly Conference.  The  language  of  our  Discipline  is:  "Of 
whom  shall  the  Quarterly  Conferences  be  composed  ?  Answer. 
Of  all  travelling  and  local  preachers,  exhorters,  stewards,  and 
class-leaders  of  the  circuits  and  stations,  also  Sunday-school 
superintendents.'^  Here  again  we  have  the  members  of  the 
Church  acting;  that  is  granting  license  to  preach,  recom- 
mending suitable  persons  to  the  Annual  Conferences  for  dea- 
cons' or  elders'  orders  in  the  local  connection,  admitting  on 
trial  in  the  travelling  connection,  hearing  complaints,  and 
trying  appeals.    See  Discipline,  pp.  33,  34. 

Are  any  of  the  members  of  the  Commonwealth,  after  voting 
for  mayor  and  aldermen,  or  for  members  of  the  legislative  assem- 
bly, allowed  to  sit  with  them,  exercising  equal  rights  ?  No — 
no  !  Members  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  sit  in  our 
Quarterly  Conferences,  and  exercise  rights  not  granted  to  the 
presiding  ministers,  who,  in  cases  of  trial,  can  only  pronounce 
their  decisions — rights  in  common  with  all  the  local  preachers, 
though  elected,  as  previously  stated,  by  the  societies,  they 
making  a  portion  of  them  at  the  time  of  election.  Now,  what 
think  ye  of  our  republicanism  in  this  particular  ?  Does  it  not 
extend  beyond  the  republicanism  we  have  glanced  at  in  the 
case  of  an  election  of  mayor  and  aldermen,  or  of  an  election 
of  members  for  the  legislative  assembly?  Most  assuredly. 
The  extension  is  stated,  yet  we  shall  repeat  it,  that  members 
of  our  Church  can  sit  with  officers  elevated  by  their  suffrage, 
exercising  equal  rights  with  them — a  thing  unknown  to  the 
republicanism  of  the  people  in  civil  affairs.  Here  you  have 
the  extension  of  our  republicanism  beyond  that  of  the  State — 
our  enlarged  liberty. 

What  are  the  members  of  our  Annual  Conferences  but  the 
representatives  of  our  people  ?  They  stand  elected  by  the 
members.  It  may  be  said  that  they  try,  censure,  reprove,  or 
expel,  without  consulting  the  lay  members  of  the  Church. 
Does  not  the  legislature  of  each  State  act  on  a  similar 
principle  ? 

If  our  Annual  Conferences  elect  the  members  of  the  Gene- 


OP  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


19 


ral  Conferences,  do  not  our  legislative  assemblies,  without  con- 
sulting with  their  constituents,  elect  the  Senators  of  the 
United  States  ? 

If  the  General  Conference  enacts  laws  apart  from  the  direct 
voice  of  our  members,  does  not  Congress  enact  laws  apart  from 
the  direct  vote  of  the  people  ? 

If  the  General  Conference  elects  the  presiding  oflBicer,  the 
bishop,  does  not  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  elect  the 
presiding  officer,  the  speaker  ? 

If  a  bishop,  executing  the  wishes  of  those  who  elected  him, 
appoints  our  ministers  to  certain  fields  of  labor,  does  not  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  without  asking  the  permission 
of  the  people,  appoint  many  of  the  leading  officers  of  the  re- 
public ? 

Have  any  of  you,  who  are  now  listening  to  our  argument  on 
the  republicanism  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  ever 
voted  for  the  President's  Cabinet?  Have  any  of  you  ever 
voted  for  our  hosts  of  foreign  ministers?  Have  you  ever 
voted  for  a  postmaster?  In  a  word,  are  there  not  thousands 
of  officers  officiating  in  high  places  without  your  immediate 
sufirage  ? 

Here  we  beg  leave  to  ask,  persuaded  that  the  evidence  ad- 
duced must  fully  satisfy  the  unbiased  mind,  have  we  not 
demonstrated  that  the  government  of  our  Church  is  founded 
on  the  principle  of  republicanism  ?  Yea,  more,  that  it  grants 
privileges  that  are  not  granted  by  the  republicanism  of  the 
people  of  the  Commonwealth  in  civil  affairs.  These  privileges 
being  stated,  we  need  not  repeat  them. 

A  republic,  in  Brandt's  Dictionary  of  Science,  Literature, 
and  Art,  is  thus  denned.  New  York  ed.,  1854  :  '^A  republic 
may  be  either  an  aristocracy  or  a  democracy :  the  supreme 
power,  in  the  former  being  consigned  to  the  nobles  or  a  few 
privileged  individuals,  as  was  formerly  the  case  in  Venice  and 
Genoa;  while,  in  the  latter,  it  is  placed  in  the  hands  of  rulers 
chosen  by  and  from  the  whole  body  of  the  people,  or  by  their 
representatives  assembled  in  a  congress  or  national  assembly/' 

This,  however  viewed,  proves  that  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  is  republican  in  her  organization.  Hear  again  the 
testimony :  ^'A  republic  may  be  either  an  aristocracy  or  a 
democracy.^' 

Respected  hearers,  the  more  you  will  reflect  on  the  facts 


20 


DEFENCE  OF  THE  QOVEllNMENT 


and  illustrations  presented,  the  more  you  will  be  convinced 
that  the  whole  question  stands  undeniably  sustained.  If  there 
is  a  doubter  under  the  sound  of  our  voice,  he  must  be  looked 
on  as  composed  of  doubting  qualities. 

Let  us  therefore  ask,  would  it  not  seem  like  piling  Ossa  on 
Pelion,  were  we  to  attempt  to  add  any  thing  to  what  precedes 
on  the  question  under  discussion  ?    Most  assuredly. 

Yet  the  officers  of  our  Church  are  represented  as  being 

clerical  despots — subverters  of  the  rights  of  the  members." 
Clerical  despots  !  We,  who  stand  in  the  front  of  God's  army, 
contending  with  rain  and  snow,  heat  and  cold,  privations  and 
trials;  visiting  the  poor  man  in  his  cabin,  the  Indian  in  his 
wigwam — the  salary  of  each  being  less  than  that  of  any  other 
minister  of  a  difl'erent  denomination,  "  clerical  despots  I" 
The  thought  insults  the  common  understanding  of  mankind. 

We  leave  our  homes,  with  an  adieu  to  the  scenes  of  child- 
hood— to  all  we  there  love,  fathers,  mothers,  brothers,  sisters, 
lingering  on  our  lips,  that  we  may  preach  the  story  of  the 
cross  to  God's  poor;  yet  we  are  called  clerical  despots." 
We  plead  ^^not  guilty."    Heaven  would  say  ''not  guilty." 

The  Church  of  our  choice  may  have  defects  and  faults  in 
her  movements ;  but  with  all  her  imperfections  we  love  her 
still ;  and  when  the  future  historian  will  recount  her  trials, 
the  fields  of  her  labors  and  mighty  achievements — her  startling 
zeal  and  efi'orts  to  save  a  world  smitten  with  a  curse,  she  will 
stand  out  before  the  eyes  of  ail  like  some  bright  star  on  the 
brow  of  evening. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  SOUTH. 


HYMNS  EOK  SCHOOLS  AND  FAMILIES,  specially  designed  for  the 
Children  of  the  Church.  Edited  by  Thos.  0.  Summers.  Net  price 
to  Sunday-schools :  boards,  10  cents ;  roan,  21  cents.  Retail,  30 
cents ;  roan  gilt,  50  cents ;  morocco,  75  cents.  The  line  ones  arc 
gems.    The  book  consists  of  384  pages,  and  contains  600  Hymns. 

"As  its  title  indicates,  it  is  a  collection  especially  designed  for  the  child- 
ren of  the  Church,  and  it  has  been  compiled  Avith  the  ability,  research, 
and  taste  which  characteri/.e  .the  labors  of  the  accomplished  editor  in  the 
department  of  hymnology.  We  are  not  saying  too  much  for  it,  when  wo 
affirm  that  it  leaves  nothing  to  be  desiderated  hereafter  in  this  line."- 
Soiithcrn  (Jhr'iHtinn  Advocate. 

THE  SUNDAY-SCHOOL  TEACHER;  or,  the  Catechetical  Office.  By 
Thos.  0.  Summers.   18mo,  pp.  144.    Price  30  cents. 

This  work  discusses  the  most  interesting  questions  connected  with  the 
Catechetical  System — the  Teacher's  Qualilications,  Eifiieulties,  and  Encour- 
agements. It  exhibits  the  obligations  of  pastors  and  toachefs  to  the 
children  of  the  Church/*and  shows  how  the}'  may  be  discharged. 

OLD  MICHAEL  AND  YOUNG  MAURICE;  or.  Country  Scenes,  in 
England.   ISmo,  pp.  178.    Price  iiO  cents. 

A  truthful,  fascinating,  and  instructive  volume. 

TALKS,  PLEASANT  AND  PROFITABLE.  By  Thos.  0.  Summers. 
18mo,  pp.  146.   Price  30  cents. 

The  topics  of  these  dialogues  are  Orphans,  May-l)ay,  Birds,  Tempe- 
rance, Peter  and  the  Tribute-money,  Pietribution,  Recognition  of  Friends 
in  Heaven.  The  style  is  adapted  to  the  minds  of  intelligent  youth. 
The  engravings  are  handsome. 

THE  WORLD  OF  WATERS.  By  Fanny  Osborne.  With  Illustrations 
Two  vols.  18mo,  pp.  186,  224. .  Price  80  cents. 

A  couple  of  fascinating  and  instructive  volumes.  The  tales  and  narra- 
tives beguile,  like  sailors'  yarns,  the  voyage  over  the  world  of  waters.  The 
descriptions  and  anecdotes  blei\d  the  charm  of  romance  with  the  credi- 
bility of  truth. 

SCRIPTURE  VIEWS  OF  THE  HEAVENLY  WORLD.  By  J.  Edmondson, 
A.M.   18mo,  pp.  249.    Price  35  cents. 

A  neat  edition  of  a  book  which  takes  rank  with  Baxter's  Saints'  Rest — 
to  which  great  work  it  is  in  some  respects  superior. 

TRIAL  OF  THE  WITNESSES  OF  THE  RESURRECTION  OF  CHRIST. 
By  Bishop  Sherlock.  With  an  Introduction  by  Thos.  0.  Summers. 
18mo,  pp.  137.   Price  30  cents.  ^ 

This  masterly  work  is  got  up  in  convenient  form  and  beautiful  style. 
The  Introduction  contains  a  brief  biography  of  the  illustrious  author. 


